Skip to main content

Helping in Haiti

By

180px-CVN-70_Seal The USS Carl Vinson, a nuclear-powered supercarrier, steamed over to Haiti last week. It is providing considerable help:

The Vinson had arrived to Haiti loaded with thousands of bottles of water and energy drinks, 8,000 sheets and hundreds of camp beds.

And:

It also brought equipment to purify 100,00 gallons of water a day, by reverse osmosis.

(Our friends over at Pro-Nuclear Democrats have an excellent post about how it does the desalination.)

And, even better:

Since its arrival Friday, the USS Carl Vinson has treated 10 patients -- three Americans and seven Haitians.

One patient, a 12-year-old Haitian girl, even managed to receive brain surgery aboard, carried out by American neurosurgeon and CNN medical correspondent, Sanjay Gupta, who was in Port-au-Prince to report on the humanitarian catastrophe.

Now, the USS Carl Vinson apparently cannot open itself as a hospital boat – it’s mission here is to deliver goods - but it’s doing what it can.

Uss_carl_vinson_cvn-70 The USS Carl Vinson runs on Two Westinghouse A4W nuclear reactors and can go about three million miles before refueling. But really, even with the obvious connection, who cares? It’s the good it can do that matters here.

---

Thomas_MalthusWe’ve rarely – well, okay, never – seen nuclear energy tied to Thomas Malthus (1766-1834). Malthus probably doesn’t have the popular cachet he enjoyed in the 70s, when concerns about overpopulation – which he, in a potted summary, thought was inevitable in light of a striving toward egalitarianism and would result in disaster, as Earth’s resources could not support out-of-control population growth. You can read his book on population here.

In movies, these ideas led to population-control scenarios (Logan’s Run (1976) and ZPG (1970) are two) and, of course, the classic people-as-food story, Soylent Green (1973), put a nice capper on the pop corruption of Malthus’ ideas.

Writers Don Peterson and Bill Stratton, both of the the Los Alamos National Laboratory (Stratton is retired), move from the usual Malthusian construction – food will run out – to energy – fossil fuels are running out.

Without some curb [on carbon emissions], Malthus’ prediction finally is slated to come true sometime after 2050. To dodge the prediction again, only advanced nuclear technology is capable of providing the enormous and continually expanding amount of energy needed in time to cushion the impact of population growth and avoid economic collapse.

We’re always extremely dubious when anything is presented as a hedge – even a panacea – against future disaster, especially when they answer to the worries of the day. We’re not to 2020 yet – the year of Soylent Green – but we haven’t started eating people yet either. (We’d also hesitate to give Malthus 250 years lead time on any prediction he may have made.)

The article doesn’t really go as far with its conceit as it could – which is to the good – and contains a lot of interesting information. There’s even a shout-out to our old friend thorium.

Thorium – about twice as abundant as uranium in the earth’s crust – also can be used to fuel breeder reactors different from current designs. Using all the uranium and thorium is the only approach that guarantees vastly increased, reliable, energy availability well into the next millennium.

Worth a read – even if you don’t believe you’ll float toward a giant bug zapper chanting “Renew” at age 30.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
23 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...
6 comments
Read more

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

By
Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...
4 comments
Read more